LANGUAGE AS A FACTOR IN AVIATION INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS The function of language in aviation communication safety

7.2.1 Accident investigators usually uncover a chain of events lining up in an unfortunate order to finally cause an accident, and language simply becomes one link in the chain of events. In some instances, the use (or misuse) of language has contributed directly or indirectly to an accident. At other times, language is a link which exacerbates the problem. The purpose of the ICAO language proficiency requirements is to

ensure that the language proficiency of flight crews and air traffic controllers is sufficient to reduce miscommunications as much as possible and to allow pilots and controllers to recognize and solve potential miscommunications when they do occur. In short, language should be a tool to identify and help solve a potential problem before it becomes a disaster, rather than being one more attention-demanding obstacle. Rather than language playing a contributing role, the object of ICAO language proficiency requirements is for language to play a problem-alleviating or problem-avoiding role.

7.2.2 Language has three distinct roles in accidents and incidents: a) in the use of phraseologies;

b) in the use of plain language; and

c) in the use of more than one language in the same environment. Incorrect use of phraseologies

7.2.3 An incorrect use of phraseology has contributed, in some instances, to an accident or incident. The purpose of using phraseologies is to promote clarity and brevity; standardized phraseologies are developed to avoid ambiguity. For phraseologies to have the most significant safety impact, all parties need to use the same, ICAO phraseologies. The importance of disciplined adherence to ICAO phraseologies is elaborated upon in Chapter 3.

Inadequate plain language proficiency

7.2.4 While incorrect application of phraseologies has been determined to be a contributing factor in some accidents, a lack of general proficiency in the language used for radiotelephony communications is more often cited as having played a contributing role. The controller last in contact with the English-only speaking crew which strayed off course and crashed into a mountainside acknowledged to accident investigators that the flight’s position reports were incongruent with where he understood their position to be. However, by his own admission, he lacked plain English proficiency to clarify his doubts or to notify the crew that they may have been off course.

7.2.5 The purpose of phraseologies is to provide clear, concise, unambiguous language to communicate messages of a routine nature. While standardized ICAO phraseologies have been developed to cover many circumstances, mainly routine events but also some predictable emergency or non-routine events, it is important to be clear that it was never intended for phraseologies to fully suffice for all pilot and controller communication needs. It is widely acknowledged by operational and linguistic experts that no set of standardized phraseologies can fully describe all possible circumstances and responses.

Role of plain language illustrated

7.2.6 While it is widely recognized that a need for plain language may quickly arise during emergency or unusual situations, the critical role of plain language in more or less routine situations is less recognized outside the relatively small circle of applied linguists who specialize in aviation communications. In fact, in addition to the need for plain language which is readily acknowledged to occur during unusual or emergency situations, plain language is a requirement in many everyday situations. Pilots and controllers frequently need to share information or to negotiate a variety of matters. Consider, as an example, the following exchange:

Chapter 7. Aviation Language and Aeronautical Radiotelephony

Communicative Language Functions 7-3

ATC: Midland Five November Zulu Good morning Radar contact Proceeding into Kerky Vectoring 02.

Pilot: Direct Kerky 02 Midland Five November Zulu Can we keep high speed?

ATC: For the time, yes.

7.2.7 While it is acknowledged that this transcript of actual ATC communication represents imperfect use of available phraseology, it is also true that there is no example of ICAO phraseology for this pilot’s request for permission [“Can we keep high speed?”]. As such, this is an example of a situation that can occur which calls on plain language proficiency in order to meet the communicative requirements of the task at hand.

7.2.8 Of course, the most critical need for plain language proficiency arises during urgent or emergency situations, when inadequate language proficiency simply becomes another barrier to the successful conclusion of a flight. One analysis of a pilot and controller dialogue in which a light, general aviation aircraft could not lower its landing gear reveals that fully 60 per cent of the dialogue required “plain language”. An examination of the transcripts of the dialogue highlights the important role that plain language proficiency plays in resolving a problem.

ATC: You will let me know about your intentions for the main landing gear.

Pilot: UD Wilco. We’ll try to let the gear down again and if it remains up and I’m unable to release the nose gear then we’ll land with all three up.

ATC: Roger. So if you wish you may come for a go around and visual check of your landing gear.

Pilot: Okay, Roger.

ATC: UD have you got the field in sight?

Pilot: UD Affirm.

ATC: Roger. You will . . . you will pass over the field and make a low pass over the runway 29 for landing gear check.

7.2.9 These communications further illustrate the large role plain language can play in resolving an unusual or unexpected situation.

7.2.10 On the other hand, as important as plain language proficiency is, it must be equally clear that according to ICAO Standards (Annex 10, Volume II, 5.1.1.1), plain language is an option only when ICAO phraseologies are not available, with a clear emphasis on the requirement to adhere to ICAO phraseologies whenever applicable. In fact, with increased pressure for non-native English users to demonstrate adequate levels of English language proficiency, proficient speakers of English, in awareness of the special challenges faced by non-native English speakers, can accommodate this challenge by re-committing to ICAO phraseologies and disciplined radiotelephony techniques and by developing an awareness of cross-cultural communication difficulties, a matter elaborated upon in Chapter 3.

Use of two languages

7.2.11 The use of two languages in the same environment can lead to a lack of situational awareness for flight crews who do not understand all the languages used for radiotelephony in that airspace. It has

been cited as a contributing factor in several accident reports; however, the establishment of a single- language radiotelephony environment that would rely only on the English language faces several challenges. It would require all users of airspace to have a sufficient knowledge (ICAO Operational Level 4) of the English language. The new ICAO language proficiency requirements will certainly improve levels of language proficiency in aviation, but it is doubtful that the current level of English proficiency among pilots and air traffic controllers worldwide would permit the implementation of such a policy without excluding a large number of currently active pilots. It must also be recognized that there are significant national, cultural, economic, and organizational impediments that make such a move impractical. Because language use is so closely tied to a community’s sense of national and cultural identity, language policies always require sensitive management. While the implementation of a single-language radiotelephony environment on a worldwide basis is not realistic in the short and mid-term, a number of non-native English-speaking ICAO Contracting States, free to set policies more stringent than ICAO Standards, have implemented measures that either require or encourage the use of English only, at least in busy international sectors.